Due to the request from another mailing list, here I post the list of
files that are giving all this trouble:
http://lxr.mozilla.org/seamonkey/source/other-licenses/branding/firefox/
Those files are no released in an free software-compatible licence, and
as they are needed so we can continue to
How about Ubuntu provides a non-free Firefox package AND a free
IceWeasle package?
--
Some components are non-free
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/83118
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is the bug contact for Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
There is no Iceweasel package in Ubuntu, but there should be for
gobuntu.
Is Gobuntu officially supported? If so, there should be a Iceweasel
package.
--
Some components are non-free
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/83118
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
There is no Iceweasel package in Ubuntu, but there should be for
gobuntu.
Is Gobuntu officially supported? If so, there should be a Iceweasel
package.
--
Some components are non-free
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/83118
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
On 20/10/2007, Bruce Cowan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There is no Iceweasel package in Ubuntu, but there should be for
gobuntu.
I realise this - how about creating one? What's the harm in having two
packages available to all Ubuntu users.
Just because I run Ubuntu and not Gobuntu doesn't mean I
I admit knowing hard to nothing about this, but why not move firefox to
restricted (where it belongs) and use epiphany-browser in gobuntu?
--
Some components are non-free
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/83118
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is
I filed a bug about this just after the deal - Bug #68008, but it was
closed within a few hours. I suppose I amn't Mark Pilgrim.
--
Some components are non-free
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/83118
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is the bug
Also note that fair use doesn't apply everywhere, and IIRC, the UK
equivalent (fair dealing) is usually considered not to apply to
software. It certainly doesn't apply to trademark law, so Mozilla could
perfectly reasonably disallow the use of their trademarks with
unofficial builds of Firefox.
Is there an upstream bug tracking this issue?
Should we keep this bug open instead of incomplete?
--
Some components are non-free
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/83118
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is the bug contact for Ubuntu.
--
Danny Ayers: presumably it's not possible to just replace the images for
the same reason as Debian couldn't; as I understand it, the Mozilla
trademark policy says you can't call it Mozilla Firefox if you don't use
the Mozilla artwork, or something along those lines.
--
Some components are
Could someone please explain why patching this bug isn't an option? i.e.
swap out the troublesome icons and replace them with versions that
explicitly allow unrestricted reuse. Hardly a radical fork. Ok, someone
with time and design skills will be needed, and it'd probably reopen
#68180 for a bit,
Robert: mysql-query-browser may be copied from Ubuntu and
redistributed.
Lenny, you must have a hard time parsing the part about the logos. You
can copy and redistribute the source code of mysql-query-browser, but
not the logo (which is included in the package). The terms are extremely
clear,
First of all, the copyright license of the MySQL logos is GPL; Firefox's
logos are all rights reserved. Before trademark enters the picture,
Firefox's logos already cannot be redistributed because of their
copyright.
As for MySQL's trademark policy, read the first section (1A). It's not
too hard
On Thu, Feb 08, 2007 at 04:13:00PM -, Lenny Domnitser wrote:
First of all, the copyright license of the MySQL logos is GPL; Firefox's
logos are all rights reserved. Before trademark enters the picture,
Firefox's logos already cannot be redistributed because of their
copyright.
Nearly all
The general line on this should be clear now. Taking this for now., as
there are still things we need to clarify upstream.
** Changed in: firefox (Ubuntu)
Assignee: (unassigned) = Alexander Sack
Status: Unconfirmed = Needs Info
--
Some components are non-free
Robert: mysql-query-browser may be copied from Ubuntu and redistributed.
Ubuntu's firefox package may not be redistributed unless the copyrighted
artwork is removed.
--
Some components are non-free
https://launchpad.net/bugs/83118
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
Alexander, what is needed to be clarified?
Alexander/Mark/Whoever will you be present at the Technical Board
meeting to discuss this issue further?
--
Some components are non-free
https://launchpad.net/bugs/83118
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
I plan to be present at the next meeting, but I'm not sure what answer
you expect beyond the one I already gave in
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/firefox/+bug/83118/comments/19
We have already put this question to our contacts at Mozilla and are
awaiting an authoritative reply.
--
Some
Matt, I must have missed you comment amongst the flood.
I have now removed the item from the agenda.
--
Some components are non-free
https://launchpad.net/bugs/83118
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
James, you're overthinking the problem. I'm sure trademark law is very
interesting, and its intersection with open source is a fascinating
topic for someone's PhD thesis, but it is not the topic at hand. The
difference between mysql-query-browser and firefox is very, very simple:
MySQL's icons
Bug triagers, please do *not* mark this as a bug against Firefox. Ubuntu
decides the trademark policy.
** Changed in: firefox (Ubuntu)
Sourcepackagename: firefox = None
--
Some components are non-free
https://launchpad.net/bugs/83118
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
The GPL does not provide any license or right to use any MySQL AB Mark
in any form or media seems pretty clear to me, so I'm not sure what
Mark Pilgrim is on about.
--
Some components are non-free
https://launchpad.net/bugs/83118
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=354622;msg=39
--
Some components are non-free
https://launchpad.net/bugs/83118
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
I should repeat my question. Is there something you can do with MySQL
Query Browser that you can't do with Firefox? Just looking for a
concrete example.
I'm not interested in non-lawyers holding forth on copyright and
trademark law.
--
Some components are non-free
Robert, since you're not interested in the opinions of non-lawyers, and
since I am not a lawyer, it stands to reason that you would not be
interested in any examples I might offer.
Presumably Canonical employs lawyers who can advise them that All
Rights Reserved means All Rights Reserved, and
IANAL either, of course, even though I play one in class from time to
time; since my name has been invoked I'll stick my head in.
Some questions/comments:
* is there a clear definition of what the requirements are for being in
'main'? I can't find one. Mark Pilgrim's argument assumes that for a
http://www.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/licensing: All application software
included in the Ubuntu main component ... Must allow modification and
distribution of modified copies under the same licence. Just having the
source code does not convey the same freedom as having the right to
change it.
--
Some
This issue is in fact specific to the Firefox package, and should remain
filed there, both for reference and to implicitly include the bug
contacts for that package.
Our general policy is that redistribution rights for such material
should extend to derivatives. My understanding from previous
Rob, isn't there the distinct possibility that mysql is not correctly
in main either? Or am I missing something?
Oh, sure. But it doesn't make such a great publicity stunt. Anyway,
downstream authors have all the freedom in the world to modify the
package. Of course, open source licenses apply
I can see your argument Mark, though it is gravely disappointing to see
Ubuntu slip further into the non-free by default camp.
Robert, it curtails the freedom to redistribute [1][2][3] - one of the
core freedoms of the free software movement[4].
[1]
Thanks Noah. I was curious about the MySQL case specifically. It looks
like their policy curtails the freedom to redistribute (with artwork) as
well. So, is there something you can do with MySQL Query Browser that
you can't do with Firefox? Just looking for a concrete example.
--
Some components
** Changed in: Ubuntu
Sourcepackagename: None = firefox
--
Some components are non-free
https://launchpad.net/bugs/83118
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
This need the attention of ubuntu devel not mozillateam.
** Changed in: firefox (Ubuntu)
Sourcepackagename: firefox = None
--
Some components are non-free
https://launchpad.net/bugs/83118
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
Robert: There are plenty of other trademark policies for GPL software
out there http://lwn.net/Articles/216049/ however most of the trademarks
are not aggressively enforced. A notable exception is Red Hat - RHEL is
GPLed, but Red Hat is a trademark, so people who exercise their GPL
rights have to
** Changed in: Ubuntu
Sourcepackagename: None = firefox
--
Some components are non-free
https://launchpad.net/bugs/83118
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
Do you have a link to an official statement regarding this as issue as
regardless of opinion it is indeed a bug.
There is one more option not previously considered:
5. Redefine the main repository as mostly un-free software or
perhaps a little big pregnant... [1]
[1]
A quick search on Google cannot find the discussion you mention [1].
http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=firefox+site:https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives
/ubuntu-devel-discuss/
--
Some components are non-free
https://launchpad.net/bugs/83118
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
I think this should be discussed at the next Technical Board meeting. I
have added to the agenda:
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/TechnicalBoardAgenda
The most sensible option IMHO is to follow Debian's lead and rename it
to IceWeasel:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IceWeasel
--
Some components are
Some people may be surprised to learn that I disagree with Noah on this
one. I think following Debian's lead would be too disruptive in three
ways:
1. Disruptive to end users, who wouldn't understand why their browser
was renamed out from under them
2. Disruptive to Canonical, who would be
What freedoms do the Firefox terms curtail, in comparison to other free
packages? For example, MySQL Query Browser icons are subject to MySQL's
trademark policy, which restricts rights in several ways.
http://www.mysql.com/company/legal/trademark.html
Of particular interest is section 4c:
C.
** Changed in: firefox (Ubuntu)
Sourcepackagename: firefox = None
--
Some components are non-free
https://launchpad.net/bugs/83118
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
I believe this was discussed in depth by the development teams, after
the whole Iceweasel thing with Debian, if Firefox is in Ubuntu now the
way it is then I am sure it is intentional that they are doing so with
respect to the license. If you wish to restart this discussion then I
believe the
42 matches
Mail list logo
